327. The present is the durative tense par excellence.

But the most common employment of the historical present is that of expressing facts when „going on.” As Sanskrit imperfect (laṅ) has not the character of a durative, like the imperfect in Latin and French, abharam may be both a synonym of Latin ferebam, and of tuli (*1). But the present bharāmi is by its nature a durative tense, and for this reason it is eminently adapted to signify the durative, even of the past. Of course, sma may be added in that case (326), but it is not necessary and is generally wanting in the body of a narration. Accordingly, bharāmi is often = Lat. ferebam.

Examples: Panc. 165 a new story begins in this manner asti kasmiṃścid adhiṣṭhāne somilako nāma kauliko vasati sma (habitabat) / sa ca… pārthivocitāni sadaiva vastrāṇyutpādayati (is vestes conficiebat) / paraṃ tasya… na bhojanācchādanābhyadhikaṃ katham apy arthamātraṃ saṃpadyate (fiebat); Ch. Up. 1, 2, 13 sa ha naimiṣīyānāmudgātā babhūva (fuit) / sa ha smaibhyaḥ kāmānāgāyati (incantabat); Mhbh. 1, 157, 5 nivedayanti sma tadā kuntyā bhaikṣaṃ sadā niśi (at that time they delivered the food begged to Kuntî every night); Pat. I, p. 5 purākalpa etadāsīt / saṃskārottarakālaṃ brāhmaṇā vyākaraṇaṃ smādhoyate (discebant) … tadadyatve na tathā; Bhoj. 40 tadāprabhṛti na nidrāti naca bhuṅkte na kenacidvakti kevalam udvignamanāḥ sthitvā divāniśaṃ pravilapati (from that time he did not sleep or take food or converse with anybody, but with a heavy mind he lamented night and day); Panc. 145 begins the story of some monk, who did inhabit (prativasati sma) some monastery, his ordinary life is described by a set of present tenses without sma (samācarati… svapiti… samājñāpayati). — A past tense and the present may even be put close together. R. 2, 63, 14 Daçaratha relates to his queen devyanūḍhā tvam abhavo yuvarājo bhavāmy aham (at the time you were not married and I was heir-apparent).

Rem. Pâṇini especially mentions the freedom of employing the present instead of a past tense with purā (formerly, before). So Panc. 202 the crow says kasmiṃścid vṛkṣe purāhaṃ vasāmi. Here the present is used, but the aorist f. i. Kathâs. 25, 74 purābhūtsumahāvipraḥ, the imperf. f. i. ibid. 24, 19 abhavatpure… purā rājā and Pat, I, p. 5 quoted above.

(*1)
In the brâhmaṇas the present with sma, according to Delbrück Altindische Tempuslehre p. 129, is always = Lat. imperfect, never = Lat. perfect: »Das Präsens mit sma steht im Sinne der Vergangenheit, jedoch — so viel ich sehe — nicht so dass damit ein einmaliges vergangenes Ereigniss bezeichnet würde. Vielmehr drückt das Präsens mit sma dasjenige aus, was sich öfters, besonders was sich gewohnheitsmässig ereignet hat.” In the classic dialect, however, bharati sma is both = ferebat, and = tulit. Plenty of instances may be drawn from classic literature. Only see the examples to P. 3, 2, 118; 119, and Kathâs. 1, 33 quoted 326.

327. 継続相を表すPres.

しかしながら、史的現在のもっとも一般的な用法は、継続中（going on）の事実を表すことである。サンスクリットのImpf.（laṅ）は、ラテン語やフランス語のそれ同様に継続相（durative）の性格を持たないので、abharam（√bhṛ; [P], Impf.sg.1st.）はラテン語のferebam（ferō; act.ind.sg.1st.impf.）やtuli（ferō; act.ind.sg.1st.Pf.）の同義語である（*1）。けれどもPres.のbharāmiは継続相の性質を持っており、このため、過去時制の継続相を表すことにさえ適している。もちろんのこと、その場合でもsmaは付加しうる（326）が、その必要はなく、ふつうほとんどは欠いている。したがって、bharāmiはしばしばラテン語のferebamと等しい。

例文：
Panc. 165 a new story begins in this manner asti kasmiṃścid adhiṣṭhāne somilako nāma kauliko vasati sma / sa ca… pārthivocitāni sadaiva vastrāṇy utpādayati / paraṃ tasya… na bhojanācchādanābhyadhikaṃ katham apy arthamātraṃ saṃpadyate
Ch. Up. 1, 2, 13 sa ha naimiṣīyānāmudgātā babhūva / sa ha smaibhyaḥ kāmān āgāyati
Mhbh. 1, 157, 5 nivedayanti sma tadā kuntyā bhaikṣaṃ sadā niśi (at that time they delivered the food begged to Kuntî every night)
Pat. I, p. 5 purākalpa etad āsīt / saṃskārottarakālaṃ brāhmaṇā vyākaraṇaṃ smādhoyate … tadadyatve na tathā
Bhoj. 40 tadāprabhṛti na nidrāti naca bhuṅkte na kenacid vakti kevalam udvignamanāḥ sthitvā divāniśaṃ pravilapati (from that time he did not sleep or take food or converse with anybody, but with a heavy mind he lamented night and day)

また、Panc. 145ではある僧院に暮らす（prativasati sma）僧の話を始めるが、彼の日常はsmaなしのPres.で記述される（samācarati… svapiti… samājñāpayati）。

過去時制とPres.は互いに近隣でも用いられうる。
R. 2, 63, 14 Daçaratha relates to his queen： devyanūḍhā tvam abhavo yuvarājo bhavāmy aham (at the time you were not married and I was heir-apparent)

【補足】
Pāṇiniは、purā（前に、以前）を伴う、過去時制の代わりとなるPres.の用法の自由さについて特に注意している。
Panc. 202 the crow says：kasmiṃścid vṛkṣe purāhaṃ vasāmi

ここではPres.が用いられているが、aor.が用いられる例もある：
Kathâs. 25, 74 purābhūt sumahāvipraḥ

Impf.もある：
ibid. 24, 19 abhavatpure… purā rājā
Pat, I, p. 5（前掲例文）

（*1）
Delbrück Altindische Tempuslehre p. 129によれば、ブラーフマナ文献におけるsmaを伴うPres.は、常にラテン語でのImpf.相当であり、Pf.相当ではない：
「smaを伴うPres.は過去の意味である、が―管見の限りでは―1回限りの過去の出来事を意味するものではない。むしろ、smaを伴うPres.は、頻繁に起こったこと、特に習慣的に起こったことを表す」
（Das Präsens mit sma steht im Sinne der Vergangenheit, jedoch — so viel ich sehe — nicht so dass damit ein einmaliges vergangenes Ereigniss bezeichnet würde. Vielmehr drückt das Präsens mit sma dasjenige aus, was sich öfters, besonders was sich gewohnheitsmässig ereignet hat.）
けれどもヴェーダ語では、bharati smaはラテン語のferebat（Impf.）とtulit（Pf.）の両方と等しい。用例は古典期の文献から多く引き出されうる。P. 3, 2, 118-119、および§326に引用されたKathâs. 1, 33をみよ。